This is an archived snapshot of W3C's public bugzilla bug tracker, decommissioned in April 2019. Please see the home page for more details.
Issue #42 of i18nCore comments http://www.w3.org/International/reviews/0606-its/ s/As for data category specific attributes like locInfoPointer which point to existing information in the document, a RelativeLocationPath as described in [XPath 1.0] MUST be used. The XPath expression is evaluated relative to the nodes which are selected via the selector attribute./Attributes that point to existing information in the document, ie. attributes whose name ends in ...Pointer, MUST use a RelativeLocationPath as described in [XPath 1.0]. The XPath expression is evaluated relative to the nodes selected by the selector attribute./
Action: working group to discuss and reply.
Resolution: working group agreed with the proposal at http://www.w3.org/2006/07/26-i18nits-minutes.html#item11. (Enumerate the xyzPointer attribute in second bullet of 5.3.1) Action: editors to make the change
Wait for update to markup declarations (will result in at least one additional "pointer" attribute; "Basic Concepts" not modified wrt. naming conventions yet
Action: Felix to make the change for: locNotePointer, langPointer, locNoteRefPointer, termInfoRefPointer, rubyPointer, rbPointer, rtPointer, rpPointer, rbcPointer, rtcPointer, rbspanPointer, termInfoPointer
Wait: response sent. See http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-i18n-its/2006JulSep/0334.html
Closed. Commenters satisfied see: http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-i18n-its/2006JulSep/0362.html
Summary: The Working Group decided to accept the proposal and to list explicitely the "pointer" attributes as desired.